[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [s4s] [vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/k/ - Weapons



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: image.jpg (31 KB, 420x284)
31 KB
31 KB JPG
Why does every americunt enjoy the 556 cartridge? Is this actually an effective round that can be used in combat, or SHTF?
And also, why cant they just accept that 7.62x39 is vastly superior?

The evidence that 556 is pure garbage continues to mount, as it truly is a round designed to wound.
>aurora shooting, 12 killed 70 wounded
>vegas massacre, 58 killed 700+ wounded.

Prove me wrong /k
>>
Its made to wound so the enemy has to use other soldiers to drag away the screaming mangled body of wounded soldiers
>>
>>35461723
In combat it's better to wound than kill, you dumb shit.
>>
File: 1507238959757.jpg (112 KB, 700x550)
112 KB
112 KB JPG
>>35461723
Assuming that flat out killing is the point of an effective military round. Wounding an enemy drains more man power and resources from the other side. And don't try to throw "stopping power" at me the fbi already published a report on it and unless you hit the brain or spinal column or literally blow apart limbs or the torso, humans can power through it for about 15 seconds with fatal injuries.

Also the wounded aren't likely to return to the field. If they aren't too deformed to function. It takes a long time to heal a gun shot wound. I was shot in the foot and it took 4 fucking months to almost be useable again.
>>
>>35461723
>7.62x39 is vastly superior
It weighs more, recoils more, has far shorter range, and requires heavily curved and awkward mags, further it can't fragment like crazy like 5.56x45mm or 5.45x39mm can, that shit can utterly destroy a limb.

Both Russia and China moved away from 7.62x39mm for a light weight cartridge with very high velocity, because it's just way better, the only people sticking to this caliber are countries who are too poor to upgrade.

>>vegas massacre, 58 killed 700+ wounded.
You know the overwhelming majority of the people wounded got injured in the panic, right? He didn't fucking shoot 700 people you retard.

>>35461741
>>35461760
Go away.

>>35461795
Holy fuck you faggots are dumber than OP, did y'all come here recently? Of course you fucking did.

No, 5.56x45mm was never "designed to wound", it was perfectly fine for killing since day one, M193 from a 20" barrel has as good a record for killing as any typical 7.62x51mm NATO load, hence why 5.56x45mm replaced it.
Likewise, 5.45x39mm (a conceptuallu similar cartridge) performs like a goddamn demon, go read up some accounts from the Soviet Afghan War, people shot in the leg would rapidly die of blood loss from the giant mess of a wound it makes, those who survived that wound would end up basically having what's left of their leg amputated.

A nominally lightweight bullet going 3000 feet per second is no fucking joke.
>>
>>35461723
>>vegas massacre, 58 killed 700+ wounded.
Gonna have to stop you right there bud, most of the injuries came from trampling or are related to the panic that ensued immediately after shooting began.
>>
>>35461944
Didn't say it was designed to wound. 223 was a legit sporting cartridge before it was adopted. Wounding is just a happy accident of 55gr 5.56 ball. It can literally be deflected by a stiff shrub at 100 yards it wounds more than any other intermediate cartridge. Which, here's the key word; "LOGICALLY" is good doctrine casualties DO require manpower and resources. An aggregate of wounded soldiers can really stress logistics. Logistics wins wars.
>>
>>35461944
I like you. I would’ve led my argument off with your penultimate point but atleast someone said it. Thanks dude.
>>
>>35461723
Daily reminder that when they made an AR round for AKs (5.45x39) it became one of the most widely used rounds in the world, while the AK round for ARs (.300 Blackout) remains a meme for LARPers.
>>
.223, .222, .22 WMR and other teeny tiny calibres work brilliantly for killing foxes, coyotes and other small game, so logic dictates that they'd work perfectly well on people too, given you can use a good bullet and place the shot somewhere in the vitals. Practice, practice and practice are ever more important than calibre selection, bar obvious exceptions like 4.5 mm airgun pellets, 2 mm Kolibri and other ridiculous calibres.
As for the reasoning behind armies using it, one of the factors is definitely that the low recoil helps soldiers who, funny enough, don't practice very much, become better shooters. It is definitely not to say that the 7.62 is a very harshly recoiling round, but if you base your training on people who aren't very familiar with firearms and not very strong, the mild recoil of 5.56 and the light weight of the guns makes it a lot easier to teach them how to shoot passably well.
>>
>>35462005
Check the average grain on those 5.45 bullets then get back to me about how similar they are to 5.56
>>
>>35461741
>made to wound
>blows people in half because of fragmentation
Lol this dumb fudd meme
>>
>>35461723
>why cant they just accept that 7.62x39 is vastly superior?
Because it isn't? Look up why 8m3 had to be created. Any ol' hollowpoint 223 will do what 8m3 does without needing the special treatment.
>>
>>35461944
I demand war reports on the effectiveness of M16s.
>>
File: IMG_20170911_111338.jpg (87 KB, 732x915)
87 KB
87 KB JPG
Ill bite
>>
>>35461741
>>35461760
Stop posting
>>
>>35462130
.22WMR has pretty decent energy from a rifle barrel, so with a decen't choice of ammo it's not bad, but 5.7mm or better yet, 5.56mm, have great advantages over it from a fighting perspective.

>bar obvious exceptions like 4.5 mm airgun pellets
Honestly you can gas that shit and it'll get pretty damn fast (at the expense of wearing out seals and o-rings).

>>35462215
Gimme a sec.
>>
>>35461944
Finally someone with some actual logic in one of these threads. OP is probably the same guy who shoots .40 because "muh best of both worlds!" saying 9mm cant penetrate a winter coat.

Also, 5.56 usually has better armor penetration as well since smaller bullet at higher velocity. Velocity beats armor not bullet weight, well at least not until a certain point.
>>
>>35461723

Nice bait, but in all seriousness, I like it because with 77gr MatchKings it can be decently accurate and do so at somewhat extended ranges.

Those are things that 7.62x39 is less capable of doing.
>>
>>35461995
Not >>35461944
But Just go away you fucking idiot
>>
File: b1RP7iz.jpg (1.01 MB, 2723x2397)
1.01 MB
1.01 MB JPG
>>35462215
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a100960.pdf
Here, nibba.
>>
>>35462406
thanks babe. drop anymore or link to a bunch if you gottem. these are always neat
>>
>>35462406
Are these combat reports? It looks like just training
>>
>>35461944
>has far shorter range
they're pretty similar in practice, where at a given distance 5.56 has more accuracy and 7.62x39 has more energy, but they're both intermediate cartridges with the same application.
>as good a record for killing as any typical 7.62x51mm NATO load, hence why 5.56x45mm replaced it
yeah pretty much. the move to intermediate cartridges came because of shorter combat ranges where there wasn't any advantage to full power loads like 7.62x51.
>>
File: 1505590133011.jpg (21 KB, 336x448)
21 KB
21 KB JPG
>>35461723
>Stage ambush on un-armored congressmen at 50 yards range with SKS
>No kills, most wounded patched up and released same day.
>Glorious 7.62x39 cannot kill a single old white guy
>>
>>35462478
Fuck, I misread it.

I can't quite seem to find any listed records for the M16A1 in specific, but I'm assuming there has to be a bunch of shit tucked away in some archive somewhere.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf
Here's the only other one I found.
>>
>>35462520
same here. I've looked into this and have occasionally heard of classified pics of VC who were killed by M16s
>>
>>35462561
I guess they just haven't been published?
>>
7.62x39 is trash, Russia agrees and created 5.45
>>
>>35462670
Story goes they've been declassified but I've looked and haven't seen a thing

>>35462675
exactly
>USA fields 5.56
>our greatest enemy copies us and gets 5.45

Really makes you think
>>
>>35462675
>>35462690
The AK is indeed a much better rifle in 5.45mm, shame it's popularity nosedived after the 7n6 import ban, because it still works great with steelcase ball ammo (which is still pretty damn cheap, even if not as cheap as 7n6 used to be).

You'd think 5.56mm AKs would take up the slack in it's wake, but that doesn't seem to have happened.
>>
>>35462720
AKs in 5.45 are also perfect for arming your girl or a kid
>>
>>35462720
how durable are new AKs? Are they as durable as old milsurp type guns?
In particular the only LGS in my area has some, Century Arms RAS 47 and IO47
>>
>>35461955
One guy took 3 to the chest and left the hospital under his own power
>>
>>35462755
New AKs? Depends on who make them.
Anything by IO is trash, and the only Century AK you should buy is one they have imported, not one they've built on their own, the RAS47 is a janky deathtrap, it uses castings in place of some parts which normally would be forged, which isn't great, but can be done, what's alarming with this is that they seem really uneven in quality.

For instance, the trunnion on a RAS47 is a casting, and this is not a part I would cast, unless I had Ruger tier mastery with casting, and Century evidently can't make consistent and good quality castings to save their life, some people have no visible problems with theirs, some have their trunnions crack, a few have had their trunnions fucking *explode*.
A big contributing factor is that the RAS47 seems to be overgassed, which is fucking astonishing considering how the AK is pretty gassed by default, hence they have added a buffer on the guide-rod behind the spring so that the bolt doesn't beat the receiver to pieces.
Thing is that the impact will STILL beat the shit out of the stock (which is the same stock as from the WASR, so it's not like it's flawed production), the stock cracking after about 1000 rounds is not unseen or unheard, while the exact same part used on a WASR doesn't exhibit that problem.

In short it's a fucking Khyber Pass tier handbomb, if you're gonna buy a Century AK, buy a fucking Zastava or a WASR, the critical parts are made by people who aren't retards.
Make sure to check the WASR for canted sights though, they have fixed a lot of the earlier problems but you'll still see that thing from time to time, otherwise they're pretty ok.

>>35462870
Yeah and people have tried to kill themselves with 00 buck to the face and made a full recovery (physical AND mental), freak occurrences aren't hard evidence.
>>
>>35462690
Soviet doctrine at the time was superior. AKs up front, supported by RPK/PKM, SVD, etc. There wasn't a need for 500 yard rifles in this scheme.

>>35462675
Not really, bullet fine. Doctrine shaped the cartridge. Now everyone is moving away from 22 Cal projectiles, doesn't mean 5.45 is trash
>>
>>35462870
One woman took one to the back and is still barely alive, they're not even sure if she's going to make it, last I read. Shot placement is a tricky mistress
>>
>>35462919
Must have been one from his .308 kek
>>
>>35462906
>Now everyone is moving away from 22 Cal projectiles
Not really, there's retards pushing for going back to 7.62mm or adopting a new 6.5mm for the US Armed Forces, but it'll never happen.

>>35462935
If a .338 misses all critical organs and hits no bones, that'll certainly not make it mean that .338 suddenly isn't effective.
>>
>>35461723
7.62x39 was obvious mistake.
>>
>>35462501
>>Glorious 7.62x39 cannot kill a single old white guy

I dont think a 5.56 would have killed him either though. Wasnt he shot in his hip? Not exactly a fatal wound...
>>
>>35463025
Bro he was in the hospital for weeks, multiple surgeries,shattered his hip.
>>
>>35463025
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Elementary_School_shooting_(Stockton)
>>
>>35462005
Wtf is wrong with .300 blackout?
>>
>>35463072
Nothing.
>>
>>35463072
It's overhyped, but in it's ideal usage (suppressed) it's great.
>>
>>35461723
You talk about shooting like the only purpose is to kill people (one classic mark of a noguns faggot). The 5.56 is a lightweight, low recoiling, highly accurate intermediate round, perfect for target shooting.

>>35462136
50-60 grain range, not that different from 5.56?
>>
>>35462985
>it'll never happen
6.5 CTSAS?
>>
>>35462290
Daily reminder that there nothing wrong with .40
>>
>>35462906
No one is moving away from SCHV for service rifles.
>>
>>35463072
It's just an odd beast. Not enough ass with light bullets to keep from diving at range, and subsonic loadings are pointy .45 ACP.

>>35463161
It's not 10mm.
>>
>>35462738
So is an AR15. In fact I'd say a good AK74 was the next best fighting rifle to the AR15 for under $1000, back when you could buy a brand new Saiga for like $700, and then have it converted proper (or not, depending on your state).

Damn shame about those import bans, the market is so empty without Saigas and Veprs, they filled important niches.
>>
>>35463253
I agree on both counts. I EDC a .40 concealed by my innawoods open carry is a 10mm
>>
>>35463119
It let's you use 7.62x39mm firepower in a 5.56x45mm rifle, which is great because trying to fit 7.62x39mm in the dimensions of a typical 5.56x45mm rifle will lead to a bunch of bullshit without a new receiver and BCG.

And yeah, it can be pretty quiet too. Is it overhyped? To a point, but I like that it does things that 5.56mm doesn't.
.223 has range and tremendous power with a long barrel, while .300 works well from a short barrel at closer distances, and can be made very quiet. People who say one should replace the other are fools, it'd almost be like saying slugs should replace buckshot, they do different things.
>>
>>35463158
It'll go the way of the SPIW and OICW, someone puts a lot of money and effort into what they think is the future of small arms but it ends up not being practical and it's shelved.

There isn't anything it'll do that current 5.56mm and 7.62mm weapons aren't really doing.
>>
>>35463773
>Implying the XM-25 is a dead end
>>
File: thegr8b8.jpg (37 KB, 480x698)
37 KB
37 KB JPG
>>35461723
>>35461741
>>
>>35462215
The special forces that first used it were blown away by how devestating the wounds were.

It was their reports that helped convince the military to make the M16 general issue.
>>
>>35463158
>arguing with retards
They just don't get it. These are the same guys that would be saying the M14 is the best battle rifle in the world and that the M16 is an underpowered plastic toy, if they were around in the 60s.
>>
>>35463680
I remember the days of $500 converted 5.45 saigas. I should've bought a truckload of them.
>>
>>35463253
What's the max effective range of supersonic, 120gr .300 blk? 300m?
>>
>>35463782
Airbust munitions came out of the OICW in the way that underbarrel grenade launchers came out of the SPIW.
There'll certainly be future developments on that, but there's been some doubt if the XM25 itself will see further development.

>>35463996
Except the logic is the opposite, the call for 7.62mm and 6.5mm rifles comes from people who want more range and power.
>>
>>35464009
We all have regrets.
>>
>>35463996
Telescoped rounds or 6.5 in particular?
>>
File: 1485135327813.jpg (1.02 MB, 2792x2000)
1.02 MB
1.02 MB JPG
>7.62x39 is vastly superior

Wrong. x39 is heavy, slower, and doesn't have the same effective range. Also poor wounding ballistics. However, 5.45x39 IS vastly superior, and honestly is probably the best intermediate cartridge ever developed. The US and NATO should just adopt it but they can't cause muh pride
>>
>>35464025
>Except the logic is the opposite

The arguments for a 7.62 service rifle fall apart under examination and rely on emotional appeal.
>>
>>35461723
7.62x39 has the advantage over shorter distances but the rounds become equal over distance, with the 5.56 retaining velocity better and ultimately being better for longer shots.
Velocity squared, nigga
>>
>>35464047
How does the 5.45x39 stack up against rounds like Mk 262?
>>
>>35464077
I don't know, I've never tested it or seen a study on it. I'm sure it holds its own or is better. 5.56 is a relatively old cartridge. 5.45 was created during the 70s or 80s and built upon the experience Soviets had gained with 7.62x39 and also their tests with 5.56. It has great range and accuracy, good damage potential, and is extremely lightweight. Like I said, NATO should adopt it but won't because of muh indigenous industry and design
>>
>>35464038
Both
>>
>>35464057
You clearly don't know shit about the ICSR.
>>
>>35463072
I don't see the point of it for people who use it without ever intending to suppress it or not use a 16 inch barrel. Yet it's soooo popular over rounds that actually make sense in those circumstances like 6.5 grendel or 6.8 spcII.


Maybe that's why people think it's a memeround. If not then idk
>>
>>35464270
It got cancelled because there wasn't a need.
>>
>>35464077
There are no 5.45 or 5.8 rounds comperable to M855A1.
>>
File: 32423234237.jpg (876 KB, 1125x1500)
876 KB
876 KB JPG
>>35464047
>5.45x39
>not .224 VALKYRIE
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/10/06/ar-15s-creedmoor-224-valkyrie-vs-22-nosler-6-5-grendel-modern-intermediate-calibers-025/
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/10/04/larue-surg-224-valkyrie-big-3-east/
>>
>>35462136
>55/62/69/75/77gr vs 55/59/60/69gr
WOW 5.56 BLOWN THE FUCK OUT!!!!
>>
>>35461723
>aurora shooting, 12 killed 70 wounded
>vegas massacre, 58 killed 700+ wounded
>both massacres committed by retards
>forgetting the 2011 Norway shooting, which was done with a Ruger Mini-14
>>
>>
>>35465091
>both massacres committed by retards
>Real Estate wealthy guy who owned two planes and could afford to live at a casino months at a time
>>
>>35464125
>indigenous industry and design
Swiss didn't switch either, probably because no one wants to retool for minimal gains.

>>35464939
Hot damn, velocity aside, that's pretty damn close to a .243. I don't give a fuck about 1000yard shots, but how fast can they get a 85gr .224 going, and how hard is Federal willing to back it.

This could be quite nice for a small/medium game crossover.
>>
>>35464057
Exactly, it's like these people forget about DMRs, GPMGs, or most importantly, fucking air support.

The M4s and M16s do what they need to already.
>>
>>35461723
Fat bullet < flat shooting
I would rather be able to hit something at range than have a harder hitting bullet for short range. Nothing wrong with 7.62x39, I just prefer 5.56
>>
>>35432040
>>
>>35465475
7.62x39 is only 'harder hitting' at subsonic/transonic velocities.
>>
>>35465486
(You)
>>
>>35465438
Part of the push for more range/lethality has to do with near peer A2/AD capabilities. US air superiority can no longer be taken for granted, so they're trying to give the infantryman better training and more lethal weapons. The 6.5mm ICSR is just one component of the modernization strategy, there will still be 5.56 weapons in the squad, along with airburst munitions and other long range smart munitions.

Looking solely at the 7.62 interim rifle is fucking retarded, you have to look at the strategy as a whole.
>>
>>35461723
We actually enjoy .223 because it's cheap.

I like 7.62x39 for the same reason.
>>
>>35465703
Also exoskeletons are part of this modernization strategy.
>>
File: pelvis.jpg (262 KB, 700x552)
262 KB
262 KB JPG
>>35463025
>Not exactly a fatal wound...
are you retarded on purpose or by accident?
>>
>>35463025
5.56 to the hip without immediate or timely medical response is really, really not good. There is a very good chance it could be fatal
>>
>>35465320
>Real Estate wealthy guy who owned two planes and could afford to live at a casino months at a time
>Real Estate wealthy guy
>who owns two planes
>Used rifles from 300+ meters
>Could have loaded one of his planes to max take off with aviation fuel and crashed into the crowd, killing thousands
>Not retarded.
>>
>>35465835
I'm saying he chose the method with an extended lead time of planning. There was a scratch paper in the room where he did the ballistics calculations. He had webcams set up outside the room so he could see the cops coming.

This wasn't a spur of the moment thing.
>>
>>35465835
What would be the point, he could never beat the high score of those guys who did that 9/11 thing.
>>
>>35465835
If you add in one little detail it suddenly makes sense why he didn't use a plane. He didn't intend to kill himself going into it.
>>
>>35463725
The .300 blackout basically allows you to get two guns in one. With a 9-12" barrel and 120 grain supersonic ammo, it's comparable to a 7.62x39 AK; good out to about 300m, then it drops off pretty sharply.

But wait, there's more! In the time it take to turn a gas block, attach a suppressor, and load up a magazine of subsonic ammo, your rifle has gone from an AK, to a rifle that performs and handles more like a suppressed SMG.

It's a cool concept, but you do need a decent number of 0s in your bank account to really enjoy the round properly. You need an SBR (preferably one with an adjustable gas block) and a suppressor (and the paperwork that comes with each), and super and subsonic ammo (.300 blk isn't known for being a cheap round either). So right now, it's a rich man's range toy.
>>
>>35462130

Honestly like most things given to footsoldiers I think the main logic is weight and cost per round. Which were the original reasons behind choosing it.
>>
>>35465703
There is no 6.5 ICSR, you are quite literally making up a fantasy to rationalize moving away from 5.56
>>
>>35461723
>Prove me wrong /k
Go get shot with it and report back.
>>
>>35464018
600 is around the max anything under is good to go, it just has the same sort of bullet travel a 762x39 has so it'll start arcing around 300m
>>
>>35466204
The whole point of ICSR was to get a new rifle NOW that would be converted to 6.5 in a couple years. Did you even read the fucking requirements?
>>
>>35461723
>Why does every americunt enjoy the 556 cartridge
Its just a good round. effective, cheap, light, compact, and most importantly many good iconic guns are chambered in it.
>Is this actually an effective round that can be used in combat, or SHTF?
It rather clearly is. It's seen extensive use in combat and CQB for about 50yrs now.
>And also, why cant they just accept that 7.62x39 is vastly superior?
the reasons are two fold. First is that the 7.62x39 only offers marginal improvements over the 5.56 in certain areas while also offering marginal drawbacks in other areas.

Second, most americans interpret platform related issues such as AK/SKS inaccuracy and a relative lack of quality defensive loadings as being inherent to the caliber when they really aren't.

>The evidence that 556 is pure garbage continues to mount, as it truly is a round designed to wound.
Source required.

>lists two shootings with more wounded than dead
Those aren't sources and only a literal retard would think that they prove your claim. Also, the LV shooter clearly would've had a harder time getting hits at that distance with a 7.62x39.

>Prove me wrong /k
You've yet to provide any points that actually require rebutting.
>>
File: IMG_3889.jpg (858 KB, 3264x2448)
858 KB
858 KB JPG
>>35461741
>5.56 was made to wound
Can we get a list banning these fallacies added to the board rules?
Military training doctrine used to teach "grazing" fire for conventional warfare.
Now THAT is designed to wound, not kill.
In the contemporary operating environment, we shoot to kill.
I have seen first hand what 5.56 will do to a person. It is designed to wound..... fatally.
Saged btw
>>
>>35466537
>Second, most americans interpret platform related issues such as AK/SKS inaccuracy and a relative lack of quality defensive loadings as being inherent to the caliber when they really aren't.
This always bothered me a bit.

Yeah, it doesn't have the flattest trajectory, and yes, the SKS probably won't drive tacks at 100 yards, but a nice CZ527 will actually be rather precise (and in general be a very fine light rifle with cheap ammo).
>>
>>35466400
[citation needed]

Don't worry, I don't expect you to deliver.
>>
>>35461944
> further it can't fragment like crazy like 5.56x45mm or 5.45x39mm can
Source needed. A relative lack of current fragmenting 7.62x39mm rounds doesn't prove that it can't. It has sufficient velocity.

>>35462005
Retard tier opinion and im not even going to bother explaining why.

>>35462215
Initially GIs found M16s to offer superior wounding to their previous 7.62x51mm rifle rounds. Fragmenting 5.56 was noticeably superior on soft targets than ice picking/yawing 7.62x51. The "5.56 isn't a real man's round" meme only really started when they began to issue SBR style rifles in earnest.

>>35464018
About the exact same as 7.62x39.

If you want a long range ar pattern rifle then only a retard would pick 300 black. 6.5, 6.8, or 7.62x51 make a lot more sense.
>>
File: IMG_3698.png (352 KB, 1125x2001)
352 KB
352 KB PNG
>>35466599
Oh and also, as far as Glorious 7.62x39 being superior....
Obviously B8, But just for the anons that base their firearms knowledge on movies and vidya, the 223 Rem, and it's higher chamber pressure NATO variant, the 5.56x45mm, is a threatening round at well over 1000yards. Not "effective", but still enough to ruin your day.
I shoot High Power and Tactical Matches with an 20" barreled AR15.
Here is a balistic chart for my favorite long range handload. At 500 meters (550 yards), I have around 570 FPE and enough velocity for hollow point bullet expansion. This is more energy than a typical 158gr 357 Magnum has at the muzzle.
At 800 yards, it's still as powerful as normal 9mm, and I can hit a B27 (Human silhouette) target that far all day long with optics.
In summary, 223 is often underrated and OP is a raging faggot with weak B8.
>>
File: image.jpg (54 KB, 641x653)
54 KB
54 KB JPG
>>35463128
People dont buy rifles to tickle, you retarded faggot.
You defend things if necessary. If youre gonna shoot something you mean it
>>
>>35466648
>>35466241

So would you say that
>>35466056
Is a decent summation of the .300blk's niche?
>>
>>35466712
More like exactly correct.

The expressed purpose of .300 black is to offer slightly superior close range performance than 5.56 out of a short barrel. The round does this with both supersonic and subsonic loadings. Really meant as a do it all caliber for CQB/tactical work.

Close range supersonic use:
.300 black>5.56>SMGs

close range subsonic use:
.300 black>SMGs>5.56

use past 300m:
5.56 shits on all the others.

ignoring extraneous factors such as cost and ubiquity the .300 black is just a better round in most real world situations.
>>
>>35466673
The idea of moving up to a slightly bigger cartridge mostly came from first hand reports of the shorter barreled m4s being ineffective at the ranges that fire fights were happening at in Afghanistan. Swapping from 5.56 is literally never going to happen, the slight benefit you get from moving to a snowflake round like 6.5 Grendel isn't worth the massive cost
>>
>>35466783
Replace close range with short barrel.

>>35466787
The fix was M855A1, Mk262 and Mk318.
>>
>>35466219
I asked you to report faggot.
Stop switching the tablesettings.
>>
>>35466673
I guess I should add that yes, the 82 gr Berger can be loaded mag length. It is probably the single greatest multipurpose AR-15 bullet in existence. It can do it all. I wish I had these overseas. Supersonic to 1k, match grade accuracy, white tail hunting, varmits, tactical punch close and far.
All you need is a 1:7 twist and you are off to the races.
>>
File: image.jpg (179 KB, 770x792)
179 KB
179 KB JPG
>>35466599
What you have in the picture there is a match grade ammo thats costs like 1.17 to shoot.
Kind of retarded when you can just buy 8m3

Also, if you dont mind me asking, what have you seen it do? Anything from a range of beyond 200 yards as well?
>>
>>35466819
Don't forget the 70gr improved "Brown Tip". Probably the best SBR round out there. Can easily be cloned with 70gr Barnes TSX
>>
File: image.jpg (58 KB, 333x767)
58 KB
58 KB JPG
>>35466537
Would you mind sharing some stories on the wounds/kills of this round?

Anything beyond 200 yards would also be of interest.
>>
>>35466673
My bait is weak, but you gave me the thing that no other anon could offer in the multiple reposts of this thread. Real, hard data.

One last question, is a 16" barrel rifle signfigantly weaker than a 20"? Does it matter at all?
>>
File: image.jpg (72 KB, 597x471)
72 KB
72 KB JPG
>>35466783
But what the fuck? The 556 is notorious for ice picking beyond 200 yards. Why would you even risk shooting that far.?
>>
>>35466881
I was primarily a saw gunner in OEF X, but covered down as SDM occasionally with an M16A4 and ACOG
MK262, just fucking drops hadjis in their tracks. A centermass hit out to 500m is a death sentence, guaranteed. Supposedly the SF guys would go like +800m, but we had crewserved for anything that far
Linked M855- The Elcan MGO is awesome. Granted, volume of fire helps. Out to 1k, we could walk them in and kill. Not cleanly, but combat effectively.
I will try to post some pics when I get home.
>>
>>35464308

6.5 Grendel is intended to provide a middle ground between 5.56 and .308. You get the majority of .308's mass, range, and energy with flat trajectory and weight savings similar to 5.56.
>>
>>35466926
Depends. Whatchya wanna do with it?
Barnes has the best data on that.
Go to here:
http://www.barnesbullets.com/load-data/
Hit .224 loads, compare the 5.56 data in the bullet weight range you are interested in.
>>
>>35466819
Yeah that was kind of my point, there is no reason to swap to an entirely new system when you can just use a heavier 5.56
>>
Wonder what it would have looked like if this rich guy got his hands on a M240 and clipped together a 1000 round belt?
>>
>>35463025
Don't you remember in All Quiet on the Western Front how quick that one guy died after taking shrapnel in the hip?
>>
>>35466819
honestly meant both but TBQH the .300 black is probably better regardless until you get out to non CQB barrel lengths(18"+). Velocity is sufficient for doing rifle things and the mass/surface area are greater.

>>35466901
Would if i could but i recently reformatted and don't have my old shit. IIRC It's something id mostly heard from documentaries on vietnam.

The general consensus was that the new rifle was an improvement over the older ones in every way and possessed a proclivity for causing serious wounds at close range that the GIs really werent used to seeing from small arms. Terms like meat grinder and torn apart were thrown around a lot.

>>35466955
A hole's a hole, they'd all be ice picking past 300m. It's much easier to get hits on target quickly when you don't have to account for a rainbow trajectory at 500m. Not to say that's impossible to pull off with 300 black, just less easy. Forget about it with an SMG though.
>>
>>35466679
Low energy phoneposter.

>>35466955
>The 556 is notorious for ice picking beyond 200 yards
If you're shooting M855 from a Mk.18 maybe.
>>
>>35461723
I have both. Only poor faggots like OP have to pick and choose. Get a higher paying job, pleb.
>>
If Paddock had done his research he should have known 5.56 is weak at the ranges he was firing at. Anything except a head or spine shot wasn't going to be an outright kill. Some people got hit center mass and made it to the hospital in time for treatment. One woman even caught some fragments in her heart and managed to survive. He would have been better served to use 7.62 he could have tripled his kills maybe even more.
>>
honestly I like it because its cheap and fun.

From a strict combat effectiveness standpoint where the goal is to kill, yes 308 is better round. If the vegas shooter had been raining down 308 I'll bet double as many people would be dead at that distance.
>>
>>35467041
yeah. the incessant “5.56 is weak” meme is on constant rotation here, despite countless kills, decades of evidence, every conflict since nam, brevik, now despite paddock, i’m sick of it it’s just bait
>>
>>35467299
7.62x39 or 7.62x51 real fing nato. Because the x39 at that range wouldnt be doing much different than 5.56.
>>
>>35461795
This. I have a 9mm round buried in my thigh (was in the wrong neighborhood during a drive by and caught a ricochet in the thigh) and that had me laid up for 6 months. And that's with almost immediate medical attention and hospitalization, not being dragged off to a field medic to patch me up so I don't bleed out while waiting for evac to a field hospital. I can only imagine how long I'd have been down in those conditions with a 5.56
>>
>>35461795
Wounding only works if the opposition has not abandoned the social morality of warfare.
>>
>>35467993

Anything larger in the 7.62 caliber including x54r. He would have been punching out people left and right down there. Could have easily been triple maybe quadruple the number of dead. He was rich too and would have had no problems illegally getting his hands on a PKM fully automatic. He would have been a bit of a /k/ hero if he had chosen 7.62x54r as his ammo.
>>
>>35461760
1914 called, they said they found a much more economical way to wound your enemies.
>>
>>35462406
>a2 lower
Disgusting
>>
Where does one find affordable mk262/318 for their 5.56? All I can find even remotely affordable is xm193 and I want superior 2 legged deer pwnage
>>
Imagine the body count if he had a M134 Minigun up there with him. Just hose the crowd down and make a break for it 5000 rounds would be in a minute or less they never would have found you in time.
>>
>>35468411
>where does one find affordable premium match grade ammo?

Hand loading is the only route I can think of. Black Hills 77gr OTM is gucci.
>>
>>35468411
Freedom munitions or IMI razorcore.

Use ammoseek.
>>
File: image.jpg (84 KB, 430x619)
84 KB
84 KB JPG
>>35467041
Shit seriously?
I always thought that over 300 yards, it was a guaranteed ice pick. Thanks dude

>>35467080
Honestly, for home defence, or sniping. I like the feeling that my rifle can drop a threat with one bullet from far, or close.
But again thats why I should upgrade to 308 or 458
>>
>>35467041
>Mk 262 is a death sentence out to 500m
Out of what length barrel?
>>
>>35468556
Where can I find a guide on how exactly to do that? I bought a rcbs set from gander at 75% off and can't figure it out
>>
>>35466955
>The 556 is notorious for ice picking beyond 200 yards. Why would you even risk shooting that far.?
Are you going to let me drive an icepick through your liver?

There's been recorded single hit kills where the KIA didn't make it 10 feet out to 830 meters with M855A1 out of a M4.

Did the bullet fragment? No, but a COM hit is a COM hit, and having holes in your thorax is bad.

Yes, the higher velocity bullets with more modern wounding characteristics in 5.56 and 5.45 are better at making flesh into sausage filler than 7.62x39, but the real reason why they make for a deadlier rifle is that they allow a user of a given level of skill to make more and better hits on targets, faster, and out to longer ranges.
>>
>>35469288
10 inch.
>>
>>35461723
7.62x39 is complete garbage.

It is literally only popular because it's cheap.
>>
>>35469311
Buy the Lyman 50th Edition Reloading Manual, and read the sucker (don't be intimidated, it's mostly reference tables, but the chapters on how and why etc are excellent).

The RCBS manual is good too, but is mostly about actually using the thing, not about knowing what it is you're making.

Did you get a Rock Chucker? That's a nice setup, though if you're doing 5.56 you'll rapidly wish you had a little more capacity. The Hornady Lock and Load is probably the best entrylevel progressive press, and that's what you'll need to pound out a couple hundred rounds an hour.
>>
>>35469911
>911
Never forget
>>
>>35468341
No he wouldn’t have you edgy fuck
>>
>>35469873
No shit.
>>
>>35469936

Why not it was a gloriously executed massacre if you ask me. His body count was much lower than it should have been he didn't pick the correct ammo for the application.
>>
File: daamn.jpg (33 KB, 500x280)
33 KB
33 KB JPG
>>35461723
>dem 90 grain VLDs
>>
File: image.jpg (78 KB, 636x571)
78 KB
78 KB JPG
>>35469856
Holy fucking shit.
Makes sense. Thanks man that really helps.

Do you know if it was a 16" or a 20" by chance?
>>
>>35469899
Tell us why anon
>>
>>35470103
>rainbow trajectory
>lack of wounding
>does not fragment
>>
File: m855a1.jpg (67 KB, 650x433)
67 KB
67 KB JPG
>>35470014
M4 means it was a 14.5", M855A1 is no joke.
>>
File: image.jpg (47 KB, 640x360)
47 KB
47 KB JPG
>>35470494
Thats what I thought but I didn't believe it, I thought you had a typo there.

Ive never even heard of that, thanks man.
>>
>>35470528
I am not the anon you were responding to, I am just someone aware that 5.56 newer than M193/M855 is actually pretty fucking good at distance.
>>
>>35466679
>people don't buy rifles to tickle
So .22lr isn't real?
Assuming the only reason to buy a rifle is to dislocate your shoulder as you kill a man is a clear sign that:
>you need to be 18 to post on this site
>>
>>35470640
Shoot yourself in the knee with .22lr and let us know if it tickles.
>>
>>35470664
>reading comprehension
Nigga you need it!
>>
5.56 is great for the military. Casualties drain resources more than those killed and the round is inexpensive. Looking at how the government goes with best value as its priority, a cheap round with the ability to drain enemy resources quickly looks like the best value, especially since soldiers can carry more of it and a squad of them can engage in sustained firefights. This makes sense, but only for the military.
For civilians, 5.56 is cool, i love it, but any given civilian is better of with a semi auto .308 even if mags cap at 10-20 rounds. If you need 30 rounds, you don't need another magazine, you need more friends with guns since you're likely to be shot. The average man doesn't need sustained firefight capabilities, he needs to stop his target no matter what since a wounded man can still twist facts and appear the victim
>>
>>35471645
Is this copypasta, because it could pass for it.
>>
>the ignorance in this thread

7.62x39 has killed more people than fucking smallpox. You don't get to argue that it won't do the job. Take it for what it is: a round that does what a handgun round does but way better. I picked it simply because of availability and the ability to shoot steel ammo constantly. If the AR was designed to shoot steel all the time, I would have no problem with 5.56
>>
>>35471957
Nah i just pulled that out of my ass. Maybe it should be though, idk
>>
>>35471963
>validate my decisions

There isn't a problem with owning rifles in 7.62x39, but you appear to be getting triggered by a thread refuting the OP's claim.
>>
>>35469911
I got a rock chucker for like 80 bucks yeah. It came with noslers 7th iirc the shit and badly worded assembly instructions. Ill pick up the book you recommended asap. I mostly got it with reloading 8mm mauser tokarev and seeing what I could make 7.62x* do, but then got intimidated and gave up
>>
>>35470640
>people

I dont.

>need to be 18
Good thing im 12, faggot.
>>
>>35461723
The based Fins still use this cartridge, they didn't fall for the "muh light, high velocity cartridge" meme. They knew 7.62x39 kills people deader than a wounding 5.56.
>>
Threads like these have been around since I started going on /k/ like 7 yeas ago. I r oldfag now.
>>
>>35470335
Jesus Christ have you no guns an ar fags been living under a rock?

It's called 8M3

A 7.62x39 hp dat fragments just like a 5.56

Face it it's over da only thing you fags had was fragmentation other den dat it's a .22 dat ice picks.

Now we have a bigger bullet dat hits harder and fragments.
5.56 BTFO


Literally memes aside how can ar fags even compete?

Inb4 muh light rifle muh light rounds. B-but it's black lookin ass nigga
>>
>>35472207
They're sticking with it because replacing it is an expense, but they've been eyeing 5.45mm and 5.56mm for a while now, don't expect it to last.
>>
>>35472302
Why is the writing and spacing in this post so abhorrent?
>>
>>35472302
Hollowpoint? You know that's a no-go for military use. 7.62x39mm is honestly overrated; people have had half a dozen rounds emptied into their gut and survived. Meanwhile, 5.56x45mm is underrated - under the right circumstances, it's a gut shredder, and that's without hollowpoints.
>>
>>35472379
It's 4:47 am leave alone autistic redditor


>>35472389
I'm talking bout da fragmentation it does.

It's basically everything 5.56 can do but in a .30 cal

8m3 is da answer to 5.56
>>
File: Ak vs arm.jpg (134 KB, 1224x1632)
134 KB
134 KB JPG
>>35461723
i did research.
7.62x39 vs arm
yeah. fuck that
>>
File: vNiTF1k.jpg (131 KB, 1340x650)
131 KB
131 KB JPG
>>35472408
>>
File: h5R83kB.jpg (367 KB, 2268x2268)
367 KB
367 KB JPG
>>35472408
.
>>
File: obrez.jpg (48 KB, 736x608)
48 KB
48 KB JPG
>>35472408
yeah.
killed more niggers than smallpox.
im going to the 7.62x39/54r
fuck your steel shooting calibers

saved that pic.
>>
File: 1500847324339.webm (2.45 MB, 740x416)
2.45 MB
2.45 MB WEBM
>>35472408
>>
>>35472406
Stop posting, your writing and formatting is the direct opposite of aesthetic.
>>
>>35462901
this is exactly why you should buy an AR instead
>>
>>35471645
Your entire argument is based on the Cold War era fudd meme of "5.56 was designed to wound, not kill" because muh 30-06 Garands and muh 308 M14's they served with being replaced with the first generation of shit tier M16s.
In 40 years, there will be salty /k/ommandos that will be saying whatever we are using is no match for the 'good ol Mk262'
Training doctrine and SOP is what determines is you shoot to wound via grazing fire or kill via center mass.
>>
>>35465813
And its a guaranteed means to fully disable a soldier for the next 6 months
>>
>>35472302
>A 7.62x39 hp
Advocating military crime?
>>
File: image899[1].jpg (90 KB, 1901x458)
90 KB
90 KB JPG
>>35466599
Grazing fire means your cone of fire doesn't rise above a target's height (1meter) along it's trajectory.

From an elevated slope, you can have a maximum of 600m grazing fire along relatively uniform ground.

5.56's high velocity makes it more suitable to that type of fire than any other intermediate round. It's drawbacks are that it tends to bounce off leaves and twigs in jungles compared to ak rounds, but its very negligible, your not looking to score long range hits in dense brush anyways.

Tactically, the drawback of the 5.56 will always be its weight (which has advantages logistically). In the types of conflicts we are fighting, would it be better for soldiers to carry .308, which rounds weigh twice as much?

The US is nearing proof charges to propel 60ish grain 5.56 w/ tungsten penetrating cores. These fuckers are burning out barrels and putting crazy loads on the guts of weapons. It is impressive shooting through vehicles with a varmint round, however.

Ballistically, nato's intermediate round walks all over other intermediate rounds, but its still an intermediate round. Bumping up to battle rifle rounds brings its own challenges.
>>
>>35472620
Zastavas are still ok.

>>35472926
>In 40 years, there will be salty /k/ommandos that will be saying whatever we are using is no match for the 'good ol Mk262'
I think as far as caliber, firearms development has plateaued, in 40 years we'll probably still use 5.56x45mm, but maybe just a different loading, maybe we'll use something derived from the Mk.262
>>
>>35473162
Ew zastava
>>
>>35473013
Just call it an "open tip match grade" bullet and make up some bullshit about how its hollow due to manufacturing processes and for ballistic performance, NOT because it was designed to expand or fragment.

T. Mk262
>>
File: image.jpg (9 KB, 259x194)
9 KB
9 KB JPG
>>35472445
>>35472408

Lel. Arm bones are like twigs.

Try shooting a femur.

Pic of 556 vs femur, medic said it was like "3 inches worth of bone dust."
>>
File: image.jpg (91 KB, 931x1024)
91 KB
91 KB JPG
> one box of 8m3 with 100 rounds costs 25$

>one box of Blackhills 223 55gr soft point with 50 rounds costs 40$

Why the fuck is this still an argument? Fuck ar15s and its wounding, overpriced retardation. And that softpoint ammo isnt even good 556x45. Its gay ass 223
>>
>>35475164
>REEEEEEEEE WHY IS MATCH GRADE AMMO MORE EXPENSIVE THAN IMPORTED MILSURP
>>
>>35474992
>what is cannelure
>>
File: image.jpg (54 KB, 500x297)
54 KB
54 KB JPG
>>35475212
Its not even match grade you retarded faggot.
Now do you get what im sayin?

>REEEEE FUCK 223
>>
>>35463725
>It let's you use 7.62x39mm firepower in a 5.56x45mm rifle, which is great because trying to fit 7.62x39mm in the dimensions of a typical 5.56x45mm rifle will lead to a bunch of bullshit without a new receiver and BCG.

no you can use the same receiver you only need to change BCG, source my AR-47
>>
>>35468867
Yup. The "Ice Picking" thing has more to do with bad shot placement desu. A controlled pair to centermass with M855 will work wonders on a bad guy.
As far as the home-defense/longrange all in one round, look into Horniday TAP if you don't handload.
If you do, you can do like me and reload 5.56 pressure 70gr Barnes TSX. It's the bee's knees out of any length barrel, but performs admirably in SBR's. Will even make an adequate white tail round despite what people say. Another great mag length projectile is the Berger 73gr HPBT.
Ram TAC is an ideal powder if you want to be on the higher end of the velocity spectrum. That's my go-to hunting powder. I find 8208XBR to be exceedingly accurate and consistent for match ammo.
As I mentioned above though, nothing else loaded mag-length outshines the 82gr Berger in my humble opinion.
>>
>>35462720
>You'd think 5.56mm AKs would take up the slack in it's wake
That's because Arsenal stopped importing them before the 7N6 ban. There were never enough 5.56 AKs to pick up the slack. Since Arsenal has no fucking clue what they're doing on the US market, expect things to remain how they are.
>>
>>35475325
Blackhills is match grade.
>>
>>35475336
What make is your AR?
Post a pic of your bolt, they're frequently known to fail.
>>
File: N1lx7db.png (394 KB, 512x384)
394 KB
394 KB PNG
>>35475453
not 77grain sierra match king for home defense.
>>
>>35476014
Not him, but there's always Windham Weaponry's multi-caliber kit rifles.
>>
>>35475733
Arsenal fell apart after the sanctions went through, now the finish on their rifles is the least of their problems.
>>
File: IMG_3914.jpg (41 KB, 1024x683)
41 KB
41 KB JPG
>>35476046
Srry bro.
Reloading opens up all kinds of neat possibilities.
This is the superior 77gr bullet if you have your heart set on that weight range imo.
>pic related
That being said, as I mentioned above, I have sandbox experience with the the mk262 and it is a fine round. Unfortunately, the notoriety and meme status has caused the price the Sierra Match king to explode.
>>
>>35472406
Its a hollow point. The military doesn't get to use those though.
>>
>>35461723
its too bad you dont understand basic physics v^2 to force ergo shooting something comparable which is lighter and moves faster results in more force
>>
>>35472376
And because it kills people deader. They've been eyeing it, but haven't changed to it.
>>
>>35472207
The Finnish stick with 7.62x39 because it would costly to replace, and it's reliable in winter conditions.
>>
>>35472406
>but in a .30 cal

So inherently worse.
>>
Is 22 Nosler just a meme round or could it be effective. All it requires to be fired in an AR is a barrel change and a 6.8 SPC magazine.
>>
>>35463072
its fuckin expensive brah
>>
>>35465999
Why wouldn't he be able to kill himself on the plane? Do guns cease to function on planes?
>>
>>35477829
.224 Valkyrie is better
>>
File: YfyawID.gif (1.86 MB, 390x220)
1.86 MB
1.86 MB GIF
>>35461723
>7.62x39 is vastly superior
Then why did the Russians switch to the AK74 and copy 5.56?
>>
>>35461723
>not embracing the superior .270
>>
>>35477898
5.56 i lighter and when shooting on longer distances it don't drop so fast and its faster. While bullet is fling it can start rotating ( like back to front ,and front to back) really fast, the hit of something like that can do more harm than 7.62x39
>>
I agree that 7.62-39 is better but I love .556 because it's a nice small fast round
>>
Can't believe this low effort troll post is still raking in the (you)s.

Also, if you think 5.56 is a better round then 7.62x39 because "it duh one dat fragment, dat commie bullet just yaws" then you're a literal retard. They both have enough velocity for fragmenting at close ranges and the increased mass of the 7.62 means more fragments. 55gr 5.56 < 75gr <120gr 7.62. There just aren't many well designed fragmenting 7.62x39 rounds on the market, kinda like how there aren't many robust barrier blind expanding rounds for it either.

>>35476714
Actually they've been moving back on that. For rifle rounds and eventually handgun rounds as well. Supposedly they've been trying to have they're JAG boys draft up some legalese cop out for a few years now.

>>35477404
>5.56x45: ~1200-1300 ftlbs
>7.62x39: ~1500-1600 ftlbs
It's E=1/2M(V^2) you hypocritical cretin, and guess who wins out?
>>
>>35465320
>implying being rich makes you smart
That's some roastie logic right there.
>>
>>35478048
There is more to bullet performance than raw ft/lb, even when you are not cherry picking loads.
>>
>>35464018
>>35466241
People who have analyzed it by the U.S. Army standard for hit probability put it's Max effective range under 500 yards. I usually go by where the bullet loses stability when it is no longer supersonic...which is somewhere between 450 and 500 yards.
>>
>>35478184
>complaining about somebody pointing out that a round has more energy because "LOL XD energy isn't what matters" when that person was replying directly to somebody saying a round was better because it had more energy
>comparing wolf plinking ammo to NATO spec 5.56 is "cherry picking" in favor of 7.62x39
It's ok to just admit you're wrong anon.
>>
My understanding is that the military preference is strategic. Yeah, a 7.62 will kill a man easily enough but a 5.56 will badly injure him so his buddies gotta expend resources on dragging his ass back to camp and treating him. I don't know the specific ballistic etc capabilities of it, nor have I had the chance to shoot them side by side.
>>
In the unlikely event that Hillary won, having the ability to share/resupply ammo with our military is a major advantage if we needed to remove our government forcibly.

Dear GOD, thanks for Trump and a 2nd Ammendment that, for now, protects our right to do so.
>>
>>35477808
How if it has more mass which equals more fragments den a 55-77gr. Where talking bout a 124gr dat fragments just like your snowflake round.

Mr no guns.
>>
File: kdBOSeg.jpg (123 KB, 700x738)
123 KB
123 KB JPG
If anyone wants some whitepapers the defense industy did on the problems with 5.56, here they are. They called it the fleet yaw problem.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a519801.pdf
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a458409.pdf

All three types of ammo, m193, m855, and mk262 required yawing to fragment and achieve anything more than ice pick, and it didn't matter on the range, they all would fall to exhibit yawing at times.

So now we have M885A1 and SOST or whatever they call it now. I can't really find much written on either to explain exactly how, but they are designed to always fragment. Or nearly always. My theory is that both of them do this by having a giant gaping fucking maw on the front of the jacket after their penetrators come out upon impact, but it's just a theory.

If anyone has a whitepaper or video on how they achieved this, I'd love to read it.
>>
File: 1391452487556.jpg (40 KB, 211x203)
40 KB
40 KB JPG
>>35478427
>>
.458 was made to fix the problem of 5.56 having no stopping power. it literally proves this argument
>>
>>35478599
How many of those fit in a normal length magazine, by the way? 10?
>>
File: image.jpg (65 KB, 576x720)
65 KB
65 KB JPG
>>35478599
But 458 is lower than 556. Bigger number always wins. DEBUNKED.


>>35478523
This.
This is the exact shit im talking about.
There are multiple papers out there detailing how 556/223 dont always fragment or yaw, theres a ton of ballistics videos on youtube showing this. Even the permanent cavities look like little 22 trails.

That being said, how do people still think this shit is effective?
>>
>>35478875
10 in a 30 rounder
>>
>>35477867
>neck up .223 brass
>load with .308 projectiles
Tadah.
>>
>>35478427
Posts like these should just be a bannable offense as shitposting.
>>
>>35478599
That reminds me that there were seriously people who advocated for the .458 SOCOM replacing 5.56mm in the M4A1, because the M4A1 was less effective at longer distances.
>>
>>35479102
>That being said, how do people still think this shit is effective?
Because it's generally effective enough? It's not 100% reliable but if you hit someone with 3 or 4 aimed rounds, it doesn't matter if one of them happens to icepick, if the others fragment.
>>
>>35478427
t. Elmer Fudd
>>
>>35479102
1. Don't shoot FMJ
2. If you must shoot FMJ, use the two new rounds designed to be yaw independent. No idea where you buy either though. Federal maybe?
>>
>>35479368
Or you could use a real bullet, and do it in one shot.
>>
File: image.jpg (56 KB, 552x384)
56 KB
56 KB JPG
>>35479368
>3-4 rounds

Yea man but thats the thing.
What if you only get one good shot? Is that gonna be enough?

I feel like one chest shot with a 7.62x39 is going to fuck you up alot more than a 556 would, at say, 100 yards
>>
>>35461741
This is the most retarded fudd shit ever made up and I don’t know why it’s still repeated.
>>
File: 458SOCOM.jpg (26 KB, 377x471)
26 KB
26 KB JPG
>>35479700
>7.62
Nigga, please.
>>
>>35479439
Federal sells mk262 and mk318 to the public. Its gonna a while before m855a1 hits the civilian market.
>>
File: zzzerea.jpg (16 KB, 600x600)
16 KB
16 KB JPG
>this whole fucking thread
>>
>>35465320
Yeah, he was rich enough to own registered full-auto rifles but somehow thought bump stocks were the shit
>>
>>35477872
>reading comprehension
>>
>>35479443
>>35479700
None of which matters, 5.56mm does what it needs to do very reliably, and who wins a firefight statistically depends on who has the most ammo.
>>
>>35479700
>I feel like one chest shot with a 7.62x39 is going to fuck you up alot more than a 556 would, at say, 100 yards

Because you are stupid.
>>
>>35461723
have another (you). this bait is not of excellent quality. only the dumbest monkeys giving a shit
>>
>>35483238
Then why did soldiers ask for more stopping power? Why does .458 exist if it does its job reliably? You're literally in denial of reality.
>>
>>35461723
>one is a movie theater and one is a concert
really made me think
>>
>>35485319
Bigger is better when the bullet is subsonic, its the same reason Russia replaced 7.62x39 with 9x39 for suppressed use.
>>
>>35485319
Soldier here.
I liked M855 and Mk262 stopping power just fine.
9mm FMJ is where you all should be focused. That stuff is shit.
Need to go back to 45ACP
458socom was originally designed to be a suppressed round that packed a wallop that would need only a barrel and bolt swap to M4's already in the inventory.
>>
>>35485463
>Need to go back to 45ACP

Nah.
>>
>>35485492
Need to do something. 3 Centermass M9 hits didn't do shit to a hadji. Sure, they leak out inna bit, but they don't drop.
>>
>>35468194
Liar
Guns only injure criminals.
>>
>>35479850
>Its gonna a while before m855a1 hits the civilian market.
Never. It is AP and you can't sell pistol caliber AP bullets to civilians.
>>
File: 1505785518570.jpg (19 KB, 262x236)
19 KB
19 KB JPG
>>35477990
you don't even know the word for tumbling, and yet here you are, on the internet, trying to argue ballistics.

kill yourself my man.
>>
>>35485529
3 Centermass 5.7x28 do stop marines in the tracks dead though.
>>
>>35485730
It's officially ball ammo.
>>
>>35485529
Congrats, you realized pistols suck at stopping people compared to a rifle. Fuddyfive wouldn't have made a difference.
>>
>>35461723
It's a high velocity cartridge. It works just fine.
>>
>>35485319
>Then why did soldiers ask for more stopping power?
Because A), the M855 is a substandard choice for infantry rifles and infantry carbines, it was originally meant to be used in belts for the M249, and B), soldiers end up trying to use carbines at rifle ranges.

>Why does .458 exist if it does its job reliably?
Because it's a hunting round, it exists for shooting bears.

If you think the M4A1 should be chambered in .458 SOCOM you are an unbelievable fucking simpleton, it's heavy as shit and you're looking at like 200ft effective range, and a recoil that's effectively unmanageable in full-auto fire, couple that with standard AR mags fitting only 10 of them and that again, the ammo is heavy as shit, and what you're actually doing is seriously underpowering your soldiers with a gun that's hard to control, has bad reach, and doesn't let you carry very much ammo.

Go back to the fucking 1800's you big-bore fetishist.
>>
>>35485432
The difference between 7.62x39mm and 9x39mm is not even close to as substantial as the difference between 5.56x45mm and .458SOCOM, .300BLK would be a much better comparison.
>>
>>35485529
>Soldier here.
You say that as if it's a qualifier.

>9mm FMJ is where you all should be focused. That stuff is shit.
You're an infantryman, if you're still even issued a sidearm the odds of it being relevant in your occupation is fucking tiny.

>Need to go back to 45ACP
No you don't, because that's not even a substantial change in the slightest, because you're still using a pistol.

If you're not engaging a combatant with your rifle or carbine, something's wrong, pistols suck at combat, be they 9mm, .45ACP, or 10mm, trying to fix this beyond hollowpoints, which the Hague Convention bitches and moans about, is retarded, and even then that's a minimal at best improvement.

The best solution in your case is to bring extra ammunition for your rifle instead of a sidearm.
>>
>>35486813
.300 BLK is a cheaper option and simpler conversion than .458, that is all there is to it
>>
>>35486877
It also reaches farther than you can throw it while being controllable in rapid fire, plus fitting 30 in a normal magazine.
>>
>>35486807
I'd tell him to go back to /v/ anyone with half a brain would already know everything you just said.
>>
>>35479700
Idiot alert.

5.56 is more likely to fragment and has more hydrostatic shock than 7.62x39

But the "ak" round does have more barrier penetration
>>
>>35478523
I actually think the M855A1 works the same way. It looks like it's built similar to an OTM, with the jacket being drawn from the base up, but with the jacket being used to also secure the steel tip to the body. What's funny is that those steel tip penetrators are sometimes loose, and can be made to spin if you play with it. I wouldn't be surprised if they snapped off to cause fragmentation.
>>
>>35486844
This. A hundred times this. Pistols suck. They trade off everything to have one thing that rifles don't; size. They're tiny fucking guns that fit in your hand.
>>
>>35487400
It also has a rainbow trajectory like 7.62x39 and lower velocities, making it harder to hit moving targets. Stopping power means shit if you can't hit. BLK is best for close quarters suppressed use, and is only 'ok' for everything else. 5.56mm is flatter and faster moving.
>>
>>35478523
>“foot-pounds of energy” is misleading, “stopping power” is a myth, and the “oneshot drop” is a rare possibility dependent more on the statistics of hit placement than weapon and ammunition selection
>>
File: 1505931221783.gif (1.9 MB, 255x191)
1.9 MB
1.9 MB GIF
>>35465401
>>35464939
>85gr .224

I can only love one thing for so long and so harshly. This is an eternity.
>>
>>35478433
>How if it has more mass which equals more fragments den a 55-77gr. Where talking bout a 124gr dat fragments just like your snowflake round.

Which 124gr round would you be speaking of Mr. Noguns?
>>
>>35478048
If there is nothing wrong with 7.62x39 why did Russia replace it with 5.45x39?
>>
>>35485876
>It's officially ball ammo.
ATF wants to have word with your dog.
>>
>>35478424
>doesn't actually mention which loads or barrel lengths were used to get ft/lbs
>thinks ft/lbs is the only measurement of performance
>>
>>35487825
Feel free to provide a citation.
>>
I don't even get why the nastier wound created by 5.56 (compared to 7.62x39) even matters to most people if the bullet is much less likely to punch through cover. Seems like the difference in penetration would outweigh the smaller difference in wound characteristics. I get the whole weight thing, but that aside, why choose 5.56? Also for 7.62x39, bonded bullet or soft nose?
>>
>>35487908
7.62x39 is only better at punching through cover (than 5.45/5.56) when the bullets have slowed to subsonic speeds.
>>
>>35487552
>idiot alert
>more likely to fragment
>more hydrostatic shock
Pot, kettle, black.
>>
>>35487943
I know that isn't true for wood and auto bodies, not sure about anything else
>>
>>35466599
>it's designed to wound fatally
What did the retard mean by this
>>
>>35487822
>If there is nothing wrong with 7.62x39
never once said that
>why did Russia replace it with 5.45x39
im sure it wasn't anything to do with cost, recoil, capacity, and hit probability under FA fire or anything.

>>35487833
>doesn't actually mention which loads or barrel lengths were used to get ft/lbs
They're approximate values, that's why i gave a range sperg lord. Would love for you to provide some examples of how they're misleading though. Ill hold my breath while you find some in spec 5.56 that comes even close to 1600 ftlbs out of a barrel. Hell, feel free to include 20" barreled rifle results if you want.

>thinks ft/lbs is the only measurement of performance
Do you have a legitimate mental disorder? i never once said or even implied that, i was responding to somebody else who was claiming that 5.56 had more energy than 7.62x39.

something that's simply not true.
>>
>>35488053
>im sure it wasn't anything to do with cost, recoil, capacity, and hit probability under FA fire or anything.

ITT: anon confuses 7.62x39 with 7.62x54r
>>
>>35487943
Source please. that runs contrary to the results of every single comparison i've seen of those rounds.

7.62x39 almost always performs better through common building materials(dry wall, wood, brick, concrete) and automotive ones. It also runs contrary to numerous first person reports from people in the military who have used both rounds.
>>
>>35488069
ITT: anon doesn't realize that the same logic for switching from 54r to 39 works for switching from 7.62 to 5.45.
>>
>>35487809
I'd say keep it in your pants for now. Until you see more than a couple boutique shops putting out uppers and more than Federal putting out ammo, it'll just be another 6.8/6.5.

But yeah, I got my fingers crossed too.
>>
>>35488087
This is where you get to explain how the difference in case capacity between 7.62x54r and 7.62x39/5.45x39 effects your claim.
>>
>>35488074
I would love to read some of those comparisons / first hand anecdotes if you can link them.
>>
>>35488164
no, this is where you get to explain how 5.45 somehow isn't cheaper, lower recoiling, and lighter weight(allowing more ammo to be carried).

Because that's what my fucking point was.
>>35488182
Sure thing buddy, right after you provide a source for your much dumber and less supportable argument. after all i asked first and you made your claim first.
>>
>>35461723

x39mm is actually the worst performing military cartridge around in regards to terminal and external ballistics.

It's ok up close (100-200 yards) with well constructed hunting ammo, but with military ball, it's terrible, and .223 outperforms it in all aspects.
>>
>>35487693
I think .458Socom has significantly worse trajectory than 7.62x39mm, that shit ain't a battlefield weapon.
>>
>>35487908
>if the bullet is much less likely to punch through cover
Because you have a 7.62x51mm machinegun or DMR in your squad that can do that if needed.

Optionally you chuck a grenade into said cover.
>>
File: wheeze.png (58 KB, 441x302)
58 KB
58 KB PNG
>>35487552
>hydrostatic shock
>>
>>35488623
Ok that definitely makes sense for military units. So why 5.56 in a civilian/law enforcement context over 7.62x39 simply because of increased penetration at the cost of marginally reduced tissue damage?
>>
>>35488799
It's cheaper and MURRIKAN. Cops and civvies tend to buy the cheapest thing to fit the bill because cops have limited funding and the average joe doesn't really care what his bullet does as long as it's "military grade". Plus 5.56 is the choice of freedom, you're not a commie are you. No? Then you better buy this American product and not question it.
>>
>>35488799
5.56 is flat shooting and low recoil, so that's good, civilians aren't bound by Hague so you can use whatever cool ammo you like, there's an absolutely massive economy of scale and surplus of 5.56mm ammunition in North America, so it's extremely easy to find in large quantities and for a low price.

It's also good enough for shooting deer, a tasty medium game that's plentiful to the point of being a pest on this continent, on top of being good for coyotes, and arguably hogs, other pests. For two legged targets, it's demonstrably worked pretty well too, I can bring up plenty of times where people were thoroughly wasted with just one or two rounds of .223

It's easy to pick up a bulk of tula .223 and just blast away or plink with that, train lots for cheap, then use nicer stuff like Blackhills or Hornady for when you're doing something important.
>>
7.62x39 is basically the new .30-30

It's what poor people use because they can't afford anything better
>>
>>35488843
7.62x39mm and 5.45x39mm are both pretty damn cheap and popular too, though.
>>
>>35489090
.30-30 is a pretty good deer cartridge, and though they're not interchangeable 100% in terms of ballistics, they have a roughly comparable performance and a similar trajectory.

So basically what I want is a 7.62x39mm lever-action rifle that loads a fixed box-magazine with an SKS stripper-clip. Also it should have a bayonet lug and flash hider, just because.
>>
File: 1480534637709.jpg (26 KB, 268x400)
26 KB
26 KB JPG
>>35489090
This.

Remington even has managed recoil with similar ballistics and bullet weight to 7.62x39 ball. Its just that .30-30 can get up to the 170 grain bullets

>>35489126
So Winchester 1995 in x54r because its also comparable to .30-30 and .308
>>
>>35489309
I'm not sure how well I'd say 54r compares to .30-30

Also I was thinking something that maybe doesn't expose it's guts to the world every time you cycle it.
>>
File: image.jpg (84 KB, 720x699)
84 KB
84 KB JPG
>>35489069
Lemme hear some of those one shot drop stories.

How far? How was the damage?

And have you seen 556 wounds vs 7.62?
>>
>>35487979
>more hydrostatic shock
Anon dun goofed on this one.

>more likely to fragment
Reason muttah Russia went for 5.45
>>
File: 1488081686930.jpg (115 KB, 558x627)
115 KB
115 KB JPG
>>35489354
You say that like its a bad thing. Mud test on the Win!

It gets even better when you realize a simple Colgate toothbrush fits into that receiver.
>>
>>35488033
Op "retard" here
The original post I was replying to said "5.56 was designed to wound (as opposed to kill)"
I retorted with "5.56 was designed to wound..... fatally"
>>
>>35489354
54R blows .30-30 out of the water
>>
>>35461723
Pfehh.

.303",you shitlord.
>>
File: zpVWeEL_d.jpg (26 KB, 640x490)
26 KB
26 KB JPG
>>35461723
Ak fags
>>
>>35490748
I understood your "joke" retard
>>
>>35490239
Just earlier this year a dude dropped three home invaders with one shot each from an old Colt HBAR Sporter

>muh 7.62mm
Doesn't matter if hits harder and deeper if 5.56mm does everything else better while hitting hard enough.
>>
File: the-dark-descent.jpg (114 KB, 640x640)
114 KB
114 KB JPG
>>35486877
>that is all there is to it
>>
>>35461795
"I shot myself in the foot"
>ftfy

Don't worry, I'm sure you have some harrowing story you made up that you're about to tell us




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.